BACKGROUND:Plate fixation or intramedulary fixation for clavicle fractures has remained a matter of debate. At present, there is a need for a higher level of evidence to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of two different surgical methods.
OBJECTIVE:To assess the clinical efficacy of intramedulary fixationversusplate fixation in the treatment of clavicle fractures.
METHODS:We conducted a computerized search of the electronic databases like Cochrane Library, PubMed, Embase, OVID, CBM, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP for relevant randomized controled trials on plate fixation or intramedulary fixation for clavicle fractures. The quality of the included studies was independently assessed with RevMan 5.3 software. The meta-analysis was performed in Stata 13.0.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION:Eight randomized controlled trials with 527 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis results showed union time, surgery time, incision length, hospital stay and infection rate were less in the intramedullary fixation group than in the plate fixation group (P< 0.05). No significant difference in shoulder function score, upper limb function score, fracture nonunion and refracture was determined between the two groups (P< 0.05). The current evidences suggested that intramedullary fixation is the optimum choice in the treatment of clavicle fractures.